Most Trustworthy Reviews?

[Ghetsis-Dennis]

Most of the time, it's hard to determine whether or not a movie or game is good by the public. Makes things more complex when official critics and the internet community share opposite opinions to one another (traits such as nostalgia filter, bias steam roller, and self-contradictory determine can be blamed) which result to controversies. For example, Skyward Sword is considered to be the best game of 2011 by the fans, yet it didn't earn the title in official sites. And don't get me started on Avatar. So I wish to ask: Which side has the most trustworthy review?

 

[jokool]

Hmmm.... Well, I think that fan based reviews are the best. If you're a fan of something, you'd want to see what fans like you are saying.

 

[Baron Brixius]

Our reviews, easily. Critics simply present their own opinion in a more professional way, but bias is inevitable. And they can simply get paid by companies to promote their media.

 

[Ghetsis-Dennis]

Hmmm.... Well, I think that fan based reviews are the best. If you're a fan of something, you'd want to see what fans like you are saying.

Unless it's an unpleasable fanbase like Pokemon and Super Smash Bros., which mean a ton of unfair nitpicks as the majority of youtube reviews are.

 

[Hector]

I think fan-based reviews are the best, but not individual fans.

Individual fans are the most biased set of reviewers you could find.

What I mean by fan-based is a site like Rotten Tomatoes, where thousands of scores are combined into one average.

 

[Ghetsis-Dennis]

What I mean by fan-based is a site like Rotten Tomatoes, where thousands of scores are combined into one average.

Isn't Rotten Tomatoes for combining all the professional reviews?

 

[Master Mew]

For example, Skyward Sword is considered to be the best game of 2011 by the fans, yet it didn't earn the title in official sites.

How are we defining "fans?" I ask because, if by fans you mean consumers, I agree with you, but if by "fans" you are referring to those who identify themselves as fans of a particular product/franchise/film/game/etc., then obviously the "fans" are going to rave about it. That's like saying 100% of Pokémon fans like Pokémon.

 

[Ghetsis-Dennis]

How are we defining "fans?" I ask because, if by fans you mean consumers, I agree with you, but if by "fans" you are referring to those who identify themselves as fans of a particular product/franchise/film/game/etc., then obviously the "fans" are going to rave about it. That's like saying 100% of Pokémon fans like Pokémon.

The fans of a particular product/franchise/etc, but their reviews are mixed depending on how long they've stayed in the fanbase.

 

[Gligar13]

Every review is an opinion, there is no such thing as an unbiased review....unless it's a parody review.

As for fans, usually they are either clouded with nostalgia goggles or hardcore fanboys who will buy anything, even when a series goes downhill, so those are usually the ones I trust the least.

 

[Master Mew]

Every review is an opinion, there is no such thing as an unbiased review....unless it's a parody review.

As for fans, usually they are either clouded with nostalgia goggles or hardcore fanboys who will buy anything, even when a series goes downhill, so those are usually the ones I trust the least.

I, personally, don my lightly-tinted nostalgia-goggles at all times. ;-)

The fanbase in and of itself makes for a poor review-panel, in my opinion. Their opinion should be taken into account alongside first-impression reviews from non-fans - after all, only analyzing reviews from current fans gives you no indication of the likelihood of fanbase growth as a result of the franchise taking a new direction.

 

[Hector]

Isn't Rotten Tomatoes for combining all the professional reviews?

Rotten Tomatoes is user reviews. Metacritic is the professional reviews.

These are my go to review sites. Because they give a score based on many opinions, not just one.

Like you say Skyward Sword is considered the best game by the fans, while I think the fans say that Skyrim was best (which isn't even going into that my favorite game of the year was AC: Revelations). It's hard to get a good read on things from one fan or one reviewer IMO. I'll take the average score over one review any day.

 

[Ghetsis-Dennis]

I, personally, don my lightly-tinted nostalgia-goggles at all times. ;-)

The fanbase in and of itself makes for a poor review-panel, in my opinion. Their opinion should be taken into account alongside first-impression reviews from non-fans - after all, only analyzing reviews from current fans gives you no indication of the likelihood of fanbase growth as a result of the franchise taking a new direction.

But aren't current fans a good thing for a franchise to attract a new generation since they can't survive with just their current fanbase for it'll only block them from adding innovative features to its core quality?

 

[Master Mew]

But aren't current fans a good thing for a franchise to attract a new generation since they can't survive with just their current fanbase for it'll only block them from adding innovative features to its core quality?

???

Yes, they want to attract new fans. That's why I said they should be looking at reviews from people who aren't already fans - they're the ones they are trying to win over.

 

[Ghetsis-Dennis]

???

Yes, they want to attract new fans. That's why I said they should be looking at reviews from people who aren't already fans - they're the ones they are trying to win over.

I see, the way you phrased it sounded like it was a bad thing.